I am intrigued by the word "merely" as in merely a symbolic representation of a group or country's core values and beliefs. A piece of cloth is clearly never the actual core values and beliefs. Therefore, a flag can only be a representation. As a symbol it "stands for" something else. To attach the word "merely" is to determine that the flag does not in fact represent or symbolize anything meaningful at all.
It is doubtful that there is any old newsreel showing soldiers risking life and limb to retrieve a flag but perhaps such a thing exists. There probably is a dramatic movie that includes some such thing, though none come to mind. I believe those words are merely symbolic representations of hyperbole.
Militarily speaking, national and unit flags trace their existence back to the Eagles of the Roman legions and served the same purpose. They were psychological and practical tools to direct and rally soldiers in the days between mob tactics and open-order advances. Men were trained to follow the "symbol" of the state or the unit; to protect it; to carry it forward and not to lose it. They were to rally upon that symbol whether in advance or retreat. When that symbol was endangered, it was absolutely counter to all training and discipline to shrug the shoulders and turn away from it. It was not merely a symbol of the soldier's self and raison d'etre, it stood for both and embodied both. That was discipline and without discipline one has the Italian army of WW2.
In the British army of the 18th and 19th centuries, to lose the flag was a disgrace - that represented defeat and an acceptance of defeat that was counter to the projection of power required by military and national strength. It involved the abandonment of country or unit itself. That was probably true in European armies in general. It was not something that happened often.
In the War of the Rebellion in the U.S., flag loss happened very often. At the battle of Franklin, for one example, Union forces lost few or no flags because they were entrenched (sort of) and in static lines of defense. The rebels lost many as they attacked the Union line in successive waves and were, to all intents and purposes, annihilated. Flags were lost because they were carried up to and into those defenses and planted there to encourage following troops to rally at that point. Very practical and not very symbolic. Men actually risked their lives trying to snatch those flags down and capture them. Medals of Honor were handed out for that act - perhaps more than for any other single kind of action.
By WW1, carrying flags into combat had become rare and by WW2 non-existent. Open order and squad/platoon tactics negated the need for 1,000 men to advance in solid lines guided by flags. At Iwo Jima, the celebrated flag-raising on Suribachi was a humble affair when someone thought it would be great to put up Old Glory and a random soldier happened to have a small flag with him. It was replaced and restaged later using a larger flag from a more official source.
To those for whom the flag is worth defending and keeping, it is a representation of core values and beliefs of moral significance. To those for whom it is merely symbolic and easily set aside, it represents nothing at all.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
The current national flag for the USofA must have many symbolic meanings. It is what it is in reality, just an assemblage of colored cloth.
However, the symbolic meaning depends on the mind of the observer. Very confused communication device if that object at the top of a flag pole is the only connection.
One local use has puzzled me greatly. I have no idea what is the intended message. Many car dealers in my area seem to be competing as to who can display the largest flag. What that is supposed to mean to potential or actual customers I have no clue.
MGMechanic, do you have a really big flag at your lot?
Lord Jim wrote:Okay lib, now you've got me completely cornfused...
First you lament about leaders not being tough enough to stand up to Putin:
Do really think that Hilary or Obamie is match for Putin. He is stronger, tougher and smarter than both of them put together.
And then you seem to suggest we should capitulate to what he wants:
I will say this not fighting Russia is the smart thing to do. We have no other alternative other than to try to befriend them
So which is it lib? Should we stand up to Putin, or kiss his butt?
Well, Jim we kiss ass and stall for time or make a deal and hope we can enforce it. What we don’t do is fight when we can’t win. And we can’t win. Our only hope would be battle field nukes, but can you see Clinton killing millions of women and children in order to stop a Russian army? I can't.
Got a call, I got to go.
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.
MajGenl.Meade wrote:I am intrigued by the word "merely"... To those for whom the flag is worth defending and keeping, it is a representation of core values and beliefs of moral significance. To those for whom it is merely symbolic and easily set aside, it represents nothing at all.
I am merely a loyal and true, post-Columbian, native, American. I will never be mistaken for a cheer-leading, patriotic one.
Symbolism and pageantry hold very little value for me. The Pledge of Allegiance recited daily and/or The Star Spangled Banner played before every athletic event is meaningless and boring. So are flag pins on lapels of elected officials, and flag patches on the uniforms of authority figures.
For me it's true, unadulterated, loyalty that counts, and not a perception of loyalty. Take away all the pomp and circumstance that is foisted upon us daily and my belief in our living and breathing document -- the Constitution of the United States -- remains firm and strong, without wavering. That's all that matters to a good citizen of these United States and I am proud to be one of them.
Oh, and God bless America. (That always seals the deal.)
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.”
Thank you for confirming the accuracy of my statement, Ray Not really necessary but gratifying in a kind of way.
I was more interested in your erroneous statements about soldiers dying in newsreels and movies just to retrieve a mere symbol.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
Not really necessary but gratifying in a kind of way.
